Wicky

I'm glad siljanus, speaking of glaring... close your eyes for the next one then...
 
Weathering pending.
 

 
I had to avoid some areas (like front mudguards) because of the stretching effects. Got enough areas covered to make the camo complete.

Gunhappy42,

Points taken. As for casualties inflicted, two things apply. The SEALs don't spray and pray. They deliver precisely aimed fire, typically no more than two rounds per target. The only time you're likely to see anything like the ammo expenditures you take as normal would be in an ambush delivered by the SEALs or when breaking contact. Nor did I say that the SEALs were using ordinary weapons. They've got some remarkable highly advanced conventional weapons and as well as other toys which you'd expect to find in military SF. It's absolutely true that SEALs can and do whistle up things like AC-130s (which don't always operate in permissive environments and didn't from their inception) and even B-52s, but there are also things like the Night Stalkers' MH-60 DAP (the choice for a hot extract) they bring to the party which can deliver absolutely awesome firepower in their support, in far from benign conditions, too. Insiders characterize the firepower it can deliver as "unsurvivable." Here's why.



Misuse of such units has been a big problem. SpecOps should augment conventional forces, not the other way round, but this became a big enough deal magazine articles were written about it.

SpecOps are rapiers, where regular forces are more like warhammers and battleaxes.

Regards,

John Kettler

MOS:96B2P,

Mine was a quick and dirty analysis based on a Google Map (not satellite view) of the primary routes coming into Ukraine, coupled with a few knowns and some informed speculation. Am not generally used to thinking militarily at such a high level, but a major route of advance can't, and to my mind won't, be ignored.

Let's look for a minute at past Russian invasion practices, starting with Czechoslovakia.

Per Suvorov/Rezun, who was there (see The Liberators, p. 168), the Russians not only ruthlessly pushed broken vehicles off the road and down the steep mountainside, but in order to get there faster, they deliberately did the same thing to one vehicle category after another, including their commo vans--with the TOP SECRET crypto gear in them and undemolished. Have separate confirmation of Suvorov's account. It was speed, speed and more speed to get into Czechoslovakia before things there came totally unhinged, before the Czechoslovakian Army, deliberately run into the ground via live fire exercises and subsequent maintenance (things like tank-sidelining "mandatory" battery removal), could regroup and offer some sort of resistance; before NATO might decide to intervene. That contingency was planned for and explicit ROE's were issued. Russian objective was to make sure Russia occupied more of Czechoslovakia than NATO did, then let the diplomats sort it out. Key parts of that invasion came via a dusty narrow road running through unforgiving terrain between Russia and Czechoslovakia. This axis of attack started in the Carpathian Front.

In Afghanistan, the invasion also had to pass a critical chokepoint, the Salang Tunnel in the Salang Pass. So great was the traffic to get into Afghanistan that pics exist of a line of military vehicles which are bumper to bumper as far as the eye can see in the shot. Later, the Muj wreaked havoc in the Salang Tunnel, blowing up several POL tankers and turning the inside of the place into a blackened charnel house.

And what do we find in the Georgia War? Another chokepoint. The Roki Tunnel. The Russians seized the tunnel, just as they did in Afghanistan, but the Georgians had aircraft and fought back, bombing the tunnel several times. They hurt the Russians but couldn't stop the flow.

History shows the Russians can and will go where it's officially impossible for them to go. In Op Bagration, they built corduroy roads through swamps. In August Storm, they brought their armor over the impassable Great Kinghan Mountains into Manchuria. Loza talks about this at IRemember.ru and in his books.

What to us is at best a trail is to them a road, an attitude helped by living in a nation most of whose major roads were rammed dirt! I used to hammer my colleagues about this at Hughes when analyzing any offensive scenario involving Russian, Warsaw Pact or patterned that way forces. It's all about achieving surprise, and masses of armor coming out of the swamp definitely accomplish that goal.

I have no idea what the road network looks like in terms of secondary, tertiary even quaternary routes, but rest assured, they do. And have long thought about it. Spetsnaz, Airborne and Air Assault units will make every effort (die trying) to take and secure tunnels, bridges, defiles, ferries, fords, etc., in advance of the invasion force proper. The same is probably even more true with rail, for that's how things really move there. True during WW II and true now. Working in their favor is that, unlike the Russia-Poland transition at the border, the Ukraine rail network has the same gauge as the Russian rail network. This facilitates rapid movement and removes a high leverage target, the striking of which would really hurt. It wouldn't surprise me at all to receive one or more reports of key rail nodes suddenly occupied by swarms of detraining passengers, who aren't, with guns.

If I had the maps to hand and a few other facts, starting with the Russian OOB and what unit's where, I could draw some more conclusions, but "invading Ukraine in the east" isn't adequate. Period.

Ukraine Combat Forces

Ukraine currently has no overall Commander of Ground Forces. Ouch. The prior one was ousted by the now ousted president.

Ukraine has what appear to me to be highly credible weaponry, with ~2300 T-64 of which ~700 are B and BV models, 271 T-80UDs and some 1300 T-72s in storage. Figure ~1000 BMP-1, 1400 BMP-2; ~1400 BTR-70, ~460 BTR-80 and some 2300 MTLB. Roughly 30 Mi-8 and 40 Mi-24 are the real combat helos, plus 19 honking Mi-26s (0 troops of 44,000 pounds of cargo).

Artillery's scary. For the Russians. 450 BM-21, 76 BM-27 , 100 BM-30 (BM-27 and BM-30 (deep strike weapons with modern munitions, to include SFW), 638 2S1s, 501 2S3s, rounded out by 24 deep strike 2S5s and 24 Msta S. 433 D-20s as well.

ATGMs are AT-4,5,13 and 14. AT-14 is the dread Kornet, the homeland version!

Air defense makes what Georgia had look like a nonevent, with everything from SA-18 MANPADS to SA-12 long range SAM, and in the middle lie the SA-11, like the one that ate the BACKFIRE C over Georgia, and the very scary SA-15 thrust vectoring SAM. Were I the Russians, I'd be worried. 30 ZSU-23/4 and unknown numbers of 2S6.

The above were yanked out of this list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Ground_Forces#cite_note-gs-32

Ukraine Air Force

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Air_Force

Could really use the Tu-22Ms scrapped for lack of money! 16 combat ready Su-27, 48 total. 80 Mig-29, 100 in reserve. 36 Su-24M operational, 24 recce Su-24. 36 Su-25 ready, 48 total. Oh! 28 active Mi-8/17 and 48 Mi-24. 39 L-39 trainers, which can carry ordnance.

Not enough time to go into the other factors, but the Ukraine theoretically could put up a significant fight.

Ukraine Map Server

(Screams for want of Ukraine Area Handbook--would have roads and rail networks))

http://www.infoukes.com/ua-maps/

Decent Ukraine relief map, but no elevations, no cities, no roads and no rails. Gah!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/67/Ukraine_relief_location_map.jpg

CIA was a bust, but NYT helps a bit.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/02/27/world/europe/ukraine-divisions-crimea.html

In looking at the Russian military district map, the exercise alerts (exercises through March 3) went to the Western and Central MD. "Look this way!" Perfect distraction for a strike westwards from Southern MD! Ukraine does have a fair force on its eastern side. See inset map in top link.

92nd Guards Mechanized Brigade (Ukraine) is unit closest to eastern border. I don't read Russian, but the Russian Wiki is extensive compared to the mostly useless English version.

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/92-я_отдельная_механизированная_бригада_(Украина)

The Google Map really needs multiple layers, like my local rapid transit map. This one shows the main routes, from which it's clear Kharkov's critical, being the junction of three major routes. Likewise, Poltava is critical to any drive west, since it has a fork for a highway doing exactly that. That route's significance is based on a take the whole country model.

https://www.google.com/maps/@48.5141904,33.1384364,712947m/data=!3m1!1e3

Am going to stop now. Hope this helps.

Regards,

John Kettler

Michael Emrys,

You are correct. We're not charging for our kibitzing!

All,

On a more serious note, I agreee that Elvis is in trouble. Trouble compounded by what seem like German grade microtactics. Turns out, though, that they actually did such things. You can see them to some extent in that OT-34 commander's memoirs I linked to in the Eastern Literature thread, but online readable segments of Panzer Destroyer reveal such matters in greater detail, back when that author commanded a KV-1 platoon. "Yuri! Antitank gun under tree by the fence. Destroy it." "Sergei, enemy tank emerging from behind the barn. Wait until he exposes his flank, then shoot." That kind of thing. (Now, I really want that book)!

Having said the above, these forces had everyone in the same area attacking, with the tanks clearly visible to each other. What they weren't doing was operating on multiple axes in symphonic level coordination. This is where Bil kills the opposition (insert Carly Simon song from Bond movie; other was inadvertent pun). In a word, he orchestrates combat power in ways a modern commander would envy, but war isn't like that. Certainly not then.

Am not at all sure how to do it, but I believe BFC needs to introduce Clausewitzian friction into some gamers' Swiss chronometer precise combat. I know CMx1 used Fuzzy Logic to represent all sorts of things in the game. If Fuzzy Logic's not in this game, maybe it needs to be. Otherwise Mentat/super brain Bil and others like him are likely to sweep all before them, simply because their ability to plan and execute far exceeds historical reality and capability. If, as Steve's publicy stated, CM is all about realism, seems there's a rather unrealistic element to the game which, methinks, needs looking into.

Regards,

John Kettler

Guy I know pointed this out... Might be useful for scen builders...
 
 
 
 
 
http://search.slashdot.org/story/15/02/08/1854255/google-earth-pro-now-available-free
 
 
 
-F

Lee McLaughlin,
 
If you like, you can play part of the Petsamo-Kirkenes Strategic Operation, where you can have
 
(Fair Use)
 
General Meretskov also personally requested a fifth armoured unit from STAVKA, voicing the opinion that this should include a regiment of heavy KV-1 tanks to break through the German defensive positions. STAVKA approved the request and assigned: 

• 73 Guards Heavy Tank Regiment 
 o 21 KV-1 tanks 

to the Karelian Front.
 
The above is taken from a first rate two part military analysis reported here.
 
(Breaks away to check some more)
 
Regret to inform you you're screwed. The KV-1s listed are KV-85s, as described in James Gebhardt's The Petsamo-Kirkenes Strategic Operation, p. 20. 
 
Regards,
 
John Kettler

BFC and/or playtesters,

If every bullet is accurately tracked, why is it that workhorse .30/7.62 and 7.92mm fire can't own goal friendlies? "Friendly fire isn't," and I see no good reason why amicide is possible with larger calibers and HE, but not with the far more plentiful rifle/SMG/Kurz and pistol rounds.

Regards,

John Kettler

Raptorx7,
 
Thank you! Turns out I've been consistently looking too low, as in the far right corner at the level where Forums are listed. No wonder I couldn't find the blasted icon. With my SAN restored, am off to confront Cthulhu!
 
Regards,
 
John Kettler

Appreciate this information and the vid, but concur with Oakheart on characterization of AK-12. Maybe it's the paint scheme, too, but to me, it looks butt ugly (and the weapon's butt does look ugly, too), elevating the AK-47 to the level of visual art by comparison. I'm not saying the AN-12 (also the name of an Antonov C-130 clone) isn't a tough reliable weapon. To get through State trials it would have to be, but I think soldiers prefer weapons that do their jobs well and look good. If both did well on the weapon end, I'd want the AEK-971, which not only gets the military job done but is scary looking (intimidation's always good) and has clean cool lines as well. And let's face it, if FMS figure in, sex appeal, if you will, is apart of the marketing equation. Aesthetics most definitely do figure in, and I now show this was an issue which concerned catapult designers in ancient Greece.
 
Philon, circa 250 BCE,  Construction of War Engines
Referring to a new type of catapult called the wedge engine, he has this to say, and it's very much marketing related, as is his prior listing of features and benefits for his innovative and more powerful version of a well-established key weapon:
 
"Finally, in appearance it is no less imposing than the others..."
 
Cited in Campbell's Greek and Roman Military Writers: Selected Readings, p184.
 
Regards,
 
John Kettler

Gunhappy42,

You missed my point. Our Elite SpecOps warriors do have lots of experience and continue to accrue it. Vanishingly little of what they do, and where they do it, you'd be amazed, is ever reported, and it's not the successes. Those usually pass unremarked upon.

Until VP Biden ran his mouth at a cocktail party, for example, Delta, not the SEALs would've gotten credit for the UBL raid. It also took direct, unreported by the media, censorship of "Zero Dark Thirty" to prevent giving away the SEAL playbook--the how-to of operational planning, timelines, target mockup locations and more which would've jeopardized, for years, ops to come. As for combat, how about four SEALs vs hundreds of Taliban? There've been multiple encounters of this type. We've lost whole four man teams on occasion, but Taliban causualties have been astronomic by comparison. Talking hundreds in one fight, at times. There've been hot extractions which make Hollywood versions seem tame, too. Not exactly a few pirates!

Can, say, four SEALs directly stop an MRR? Doubtful. But what if Regiment and Division CPs go boom; if the ammo dumps (unbelievavly densely packed and not fire protected) go up in a spectacular, combat power eviscerating, display; if the 2S6 Tunguskas won't start, no matter what? What if the if cartridges start blowing up in the user's rifles and MGs; if within-own-lines jamming disrupts communication; if mobile CPs and artillery observation vehicles are taken out in rapid succession? How about delayed-action charges causing AFVs, ammo and fuel trucks to suddenly explode? These and more are all doable.

Organizations which don't encourage initiative tend to come unstuck when presented with unplanned for events, and decapitation type attacks offer particularly high leverage. As always, the enemy rear areas are rich pickings and upheaval there can take the steam out of an offensive in a hurry. Tunnels, bridges and other constrained locations also offer great possibilities for mischief.

Regards,

John Kettler

Dadekster,

I fear you've got your metaphors mixed up. You slap someone's face with a glove, but you throw down the gauntlet. I will admit, though, that your approach is certainly hard to ignore and is highly provoking.

Regards,

John Kettler

A week off work means a week to play the larger/more complex scenarios I've been itching to get to. "Carbide Carbide" ships with the original game, but a redux with rationalized scoring was made by George MC and is the subject of this video:
 

 
 
The map was gorgeous; lush and an interesting mix of terrain. The defense was interesting and my casualties definitely reflect the good placement on the part of the mapmaker - blind luck is what largely prevented it from being worse. All in all a scenario that captures the essence of the breakout from 'Hedgerow Hell', and has a bit of everything - house to house fighting, combined arms attacks, plenty of artillery and, of course, the potential for some small-armor action.
 
Edit: Known issues; pixelation of some footage. My recorder apparently does not like alot of camera movement, so I suspect I'll have to use more static cuts in further videos.

I am in fact here, but have been tied up with a variety of tasks.  Have taken time to do some posts on other topics, but just could not compile the energy to keep after this.  I will make the effort to finish but not immediately.  As reported on Bil's side, we were forced to call the scenario due to technical difficulties with the older beta build we were using.  Bil conceded defeat, though after inflicting more casualties.  Think I am down 3 Brads from where I left off.  However, Bil is down several more BMPs including one that Brytva 21 took out at near point-blank range!  Will have to post vid from Russian side, because he couldn't save that turn and send it back to me!  Thanks for your attention here, and the encouragement.  Will make the effort to compile as a .pdf, and may do something similar front to back.  Was toying with the ID of doing this sort of write up for a scenario against the AI, as it would turn faster.  We'll see.  
 
While this scenario does not appear in the release, look for it in modified form on the 'new' repository, coming soon to a BFC.com near you!  

JasonC,

I never ceased to be amazed by the stuff you know. Do you have a time machine and count these weapons as they come off the production line?

On a more serious note, the 37s aren't going to be covering the frontoviki per se. Rather, they'll be protecting HQs, supply dumps, bridges, choke points, defiles, key transportation assets, and similar. Again, this is exactly the way they were used in the Cold War, and the doctrinal writings also emphasize flak traps, surprise fire and orientation on expected axes of attack. Mobile assets on halftracks will have similar priorities, but will move with the protected formation. I say this having done threat laydowns for everything from a Lead March Security Detachment to all of East Germany at the start of a conventional war.

A nation which still uses linear artillery deployments is going to do the same thing then that it does now. It's simply a matter of qualitative and quantitative improvement. Flak coverage probably will extend past the FEBA/FLOT, but that's a side effect, rather than a deliberate choice. AAA assets are limited, and commanders ruthlessly protect only the essentials--starting with themselves. It starts with troops firing rifles, MGs and ATRs into the air and goes up from there, clear to the radar-directed 85mm KS-12s and 100mm KS-18s defending the Kremlin. Every unit has some sort of air defense, and when you start plotting all those weapon range circles on a map, it starts to get ugly for any intruding aircraft.

Regards,

John Kettler

mjkerner,

How I yearn to be average, then! Not even close--when I have the necessary circuits firing so I can play.

Skwabie,

The answer must be of course. Else, how are the tankodesntaniki supposed to protect their armored steed? In practice, and I seriously doubt this could be coded, the SL is behind the turret, fairly well protected, kneeling or squatting and positioned so that he can either bang on the hatch, when the tank's buttoned, or get the TC's attention when unbuttoned. He's doing the real spotting. The rest of the squad is a) hanging on for dear life while looking for close-in threats out to, say, 0-100 meters. Guys with Tellermines to guys with Panzerschrecks. Brrp. Brrp. Gefallen im Krieg!

Regards,

John Kettler

Michael Emrys,

I understood the intended message, but it was too much fun to pass up. That said, I narrowly avoided multiple semantic gaffes in the thread on the article about the history of BFC. Still, tough to top a doozie I saw in a book I'm laboriously reading. "One much prefers to be thought a fool than be thought a nave." Don't know about you, but I have zero interest in being part of a church's architecture!

And Bil marches and grinds on, providing us with insightful running commentary and fabulous AFV screenshots. Meanwhile, I think Elvis has shown both teeth and an appetite to use them. So far, it's been a nip here, a nip there. Will he last long enough to make a proper bite? In any event, rabid or not, Bil clearly plans to put him down.

Regards,

John Kettler

For gamers here in the States, at least, pizza is a favorite gaming adjunct. It's generally consumed during or after the game, particularly when in a social situation--where great quantities disappear in short order. The valuable information at this link may cause many to take a hard look maybe not at pizza per se, but whence it comes. I was hankering for pizza today, and in my search for the best chain pizza, found this, which cost Dominos a sale. I believe this link to be within Forum Rules, for it's information and offers no competing games.
Nor is the below author's name hype.

If You’ve Ever Eaten Pizza Before, This Will Blow Your Mind (Maybe Literally)
By Food Babe

http://foodbabe.com/2014/03/23/if-youve-ever-eaten-pizza-before-this-will-blow-your-mind/

Regards,

John Kettler

sburke,

How about paying attention to the information, rather than deriding it because I won't reveal my sources? Every single day there are dozens of unattributed stories--"a senior White House official said today;" "according to an intelligence source not allowed to talk to the media;" "said an official at State who didn't wish to be identified," to name but a few--presented to the world. No one even blinks over this. What seems to be the case here is that you find it a) difficult to believe I have such sources myself and that they would tell me all sorts of highly classified things. I have them, and they talk to me because I have the peculiar skills to understand the information, place it in an overall context, look at it critically and present it with great discretion. This information is provided because the suppliers, at great risk to themselves, seek to inform the American people about pertinent matters, some of grave import. I walk a very narrow tightrope between getting the word out and saying too much.

You fail to realize that secrets are the lingua franca in DC and elsewhere. They are leaked accidentally (would you believe a very much still classified S/NOFORN/WNINTEL satellite pic of an Su-27 prototype at Ramenskoye, outside of Moscow, a pic which appeared in the Defense Authorization Hearings volume? Nearly gave spook types a heart attack) and on purpose, as in JFK's using highly sensitive missile intelligence (briefed to him since he might become president) for slamming the Eisenhower over the "Missile Gap" before the election of JFK. "Scooter" Libby outed CIA clandestine officer Valerie Plame for political gain.

I believe gratitude is in order, not to me, but for those brave Americans who care enough to at least partially alleviate the information gap; to pull aside, however briefly, the curtain of secrecy and show us what's really going on.

Regards,

John Kettler

These buggers aren´t easy to mod at all. But I´m almost there now - at least with the M4A1 Mid version.
 
rek sherm

Michael Emrys,

Speaking as someone who took major hits on high school papers because of the odd typo and who once worked in the rigorous financial printing environment (mandatory filings with the SEC) as a proofreader; who also peer tutored Expository Writing in college and is a multiply published author, I understand where you're coming from. I seem to have developed a kind of typing dyslexia, and I don't always catch the mistakes. I have to constantly ensure that "command," "commander" and "comment" are typed correctly to begin with, or caught and fixed if not right the first time. Else, for an unknown reason or reasons, what emerges from my fingers are: "commnad," "commnader" and "commnet." Also, for some reason, I now seem to hit the space key in such a way as to lop off the planned last letter, which then appends the putative last letter to the front of the next word, creating several opportunities for uncaught errors. For real fun, try typing a URL with a comma where a period goes, then hitting Return! I tend to do most of my posting while up way late and oft in pain, neither contributing to stellar grammar, punctuation or, embarrassingly, spelling. Am an excellent speller under good conditions. Further, I've also been known to change my thought path during a post and then fail to make certain upstream adjustments to things like number, tense, noun-pronoun agreement and such. Were I not under so much stress, often in pain and being hammered on the sleep front, I guarantee you the hobgoblin counts in my posts would drop precipitously. Nor does a resounding crack to the head help matters. Naturally, it is precisely after the posting correction clock has run out that I discover "minor" stuff, such as having left the verb out altogether in a long, complex sentence. Not good.

molotov_billy,

Here's a look at what a US 5th Grader is expected to know.

http://www.playbuzz.com/gregs/are-you-actually-smarter-than-a-fifth-grader

And if that doesn't frighten you, take a look at, for example, the 1st and 2nd Grade questions for Science here. The competitor had a 3.6 GPA in college. The intellectual mayhem begins at around 3:30.

Excerpt from the hit US TV show "Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader?" According to the pertinent Wiki, all questions were taken from actual textbooks for Grades 1-5.



Regards,

John Kettler

ikalugin,
 
I've read Red Army, though right now I don't remember much about it. One thing which did stick was his description of a BMP-2 supported infantry attack in which the hapless character, like his fellows, went into battle with a whole 90 rounds for his AK-47--one mag in the gun and two on his web gear. I remember reading that with disbelief, but with the references I had on hand, I was of the opinion Peters got it right. Contrast that with the 300 (admittedly much lighter) rounds GIs carried in Vietnam for their M16s. Unsurprisingly, the Russian guy got into a firefight, ran out of ammo and became a casualty as a NATO counterattack mopped the floor with his unit, which I believe had taken a farm and was holding the buildings. I recall, too, how desirous I was of getting the book when I saw the author's background in military intel.
 
TacError may be a member of the forum, but a search on this BB found no one of that name. Am guessing it's a different one. I did learn a fair amount of Russian military vocabulary, had an official Army Russian-English dictionary, could figure out quite a bit if I had the transliterated words, many of which were essentially ports from English and elsewhere: artilleriya, komandir, komandny,divisiya, raketnya, punkt (straight from German, as schwerpunkt), avtomat, granat (again German) and learned others. Zenith Rocket Troops baffled me when I came across the expression, but it eventually made perfect sense. Grau was gray in German, but as GRAU, something altogether different. Was absolutely blown away by the incredible level of detail on Russian military maps, and I had a symbol interpretation manual for such things. Some military-technical terms confused me, such as shell or weapon of cumulative effect. Eventually, especially after looking at drawings, considering the knowns and such, I decided it had to be HEAT. Arrow or arrowhead was also a problem, but I figured out it was APCR/HVAP (US parlance, "T" in CM).
 
I owned the Officer's Handbook in Russian, which I couldn't read, but from which I was able to learn a great deal of interest, ranging from tube artillery, mortars, projectiles-various field fortifications. It didn't take a college degree to decipher what categories the tables represented, either. I had that coffee table book I mentioned and another one commemorating I forget how many years of the Warsaw Pact, and it featured the armed forces of satellite countries. There was even a pic of all the Russian and foreign military big cheeses in their COP/KOP watching one of the big military exercises. Clear large format photos which showed me things my threat docs didn't have, such as incredible close shot of the SA-13 GOPHER/Strela 10, with a spectacular view of the radar. I had a similar but smaller format book on the Russian Navy, and it had a threat analyst's Christmas worth of close range color pics of the various radars, optical and EO sensors, jammers, weapons and much more. But for real fun, as an English speaker, try making sense of a crude machine translation of A. Tonkikh's Overcoming Antitank Defense where every thee or four words the computer presents no less than three possible meanings for a word it doesn't understand. Almost went nuts plowing through that. I couldn't read Russian, but I had several file cabinets full of classified documents covering the full spectrum of the Russian military--from hand grenades all the way out to capabilities to mess with satellites in geosynchronous orbit. I read the Soviet Military Thought series, which GRU Colonel Oleg Penkovsky obtained for the West. These were TOP SECRET and SECRET General Staff pubs when he purloined them: Grechko, Malinovsky, Sidorenko, Rotmistrov and many others were in my bookcase at work. I read widely in open source and, as noted, had access to back channel data as well. When the Chief Technology Officer, an ex-Project Paperclip scientist, for Hughes Missile Systems Group needed to know about the threat, I was summoned, despite the fact he had clearances which dwarfed mine. Nor is it my opinion I knew what I was doing, for I had the generals and admirals from multiple services practically dislocate my shoulder shaking my hand after briefings, there were attempts made to recruit me for one alphabet soup agency, and on several occasions I caused huge uproars by looking at threat issues in such a way I uncovered black projects. Would I have been even better knowing Russian? Doubtless, and I'd begun working on it before imploding health forced me out of military aerospace.
 
You should also understand that I'd been immersed in espionage and covert ops since early childhood, studies I continue to this day. So extensive was my reading in espionage that when I interviewed with the CIA for a field officer trainee job, I'd read all but two espionage books on the "here's what this is all about" page 8.5 x 11" list. And I came into military aerospace with a considerable wargaming background at the tactical level, too. In fact, it was knowing Russian organization and equipment which allowed to make a big splash when I was being interviewed at Hughes. In walks this big cowboy type,a great guy who turned out to be a retired Army LT COL who'd been battlefield commissioned in WW II and had basically gotten TOW into the Army while serving. He ran TOW analyses for all the TOW projects, both US and foreign. He wore a perplexed look and said "I can't figure out where these 130 mm guns go in the division." To the surprise of everyone there (department manager, assistant manager, section heads and senior people), I reply "That's because the 130 mm M-46 isn't a divisional asset; it's found at Army and Front level." Lots of eyes went wide over this young lad presuming to speak in such august company, but what I said triggered a synapse in the cowboy, and he responded that I was right. I have no doubt this incident was key to getting me my first job in military aerospace. Summing up, I was by no means as crippled or clueless as you think I was, even lacking Russian language skills.
 
Regards,
 
John Kettler

Na Vaske, the first rule about responding to anything Kettler writes is to view what he says with a huge grain of salt. 

I'm surprised not one person has replied to this post, since it would seem highly topical.

Regards,

John Kettler

When I compare what I'm seeing in various pics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parachute_Regiment_(United_Kingdom)#mediaviewer/File:Private_Smith_8th_Parachute_Battalion.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parachute_Regiment_(United_Kingdom)#mediaviewer/File:Four_men_of_the_1st_Paratroop_Battalion.jpg

and the 1946 docudrama "Theirs Is the Glory" regarding the individual loads for the Paras vs what the 101st airborne guys had on D-Day, I find myself wondering why the British came to the party so seemingly underdressed? Their field packs look like something more suited to a picnic than war, so I marvel they lasted as long as they did, considering they would appear to have had very little per man to begin with. Obviously, pockets figure in as well, but the Americans had roomy pockets, too.

http://www.101airborneww2.com/equipment.html

Regards,

John Kettler

Wicky,

As usual you're behaving rudely. I do wish you would stop. I especially wish you'd stop invoking matters which you know perfectly well I'm not allowed to discuss. This allows you to pot away at me, knowing I am defenseless in terms of specifically replying. Ungentlemanly and boorish behavior at best. I will say, though, that I can comprehensively refute your sweeping generalization. Anyone desirous of such proof may PM me.

I'm still trying to reconstruct where I saw the statement about HM applying persuasion to Hackett, and more and more I'm starting to think it was a brief instant during an interview. Meanwhile, here's a thought model for you to ponder.

General Sir John Hackett had a glittering career as both a top-notch solder and an academic. His British Empire level awards were: CB, CBE, KB, KCB and GCB. Do you really believe, for one second, that were word passed from the Queen to the effect "We do not consider it wise for to publish the book as currently written, and We most strongly suggest you rewrite it as a warning and show how NATO barely scrapes by," that he would even think twice about complying? She is, after all, his Sovereign and he her loyal Subject, a man who has shed blood on behalf of the Crown and endured mortal peril on its behalf many times. If the US government can obtain advance copies of books it finds threatening and arm-twist changes before publication to meet its concerns (see Agee, Inside the Company, which came out redacted, likewise Ellsberg, The Pentagon Papers), do you really believe the British Government couldn't and wouldn't do the same? Here's what the British Government is attempting to do right now--for vastly smaller stakes than something which could be deemed as affecting what some might deem Security of the Realm.

http://boingboing.net/2014/10/17/writers-condemn-uk-book-censor.html

Understand that Hackett was not some Tom Clancy type. He was a revered and august man of international stature and renown, a man who was, in a real sense, the glory of the Nation. Consequently, when he wrote, from the perspective of a man who's known war, including helping launch the LRDG, SAS and Popski's Private Army; who organized and was CO of 4th Para in terrible strife at Arnhem, who commanded the BAOR and NORTHAG and finished his career as the DCGS; it was of immense gravity and import. If you don't think so, I invite you to see for yourself some of the major journals which reviewed his book. Here's one: Bulletin of Atomic Scientists: January 1980 (p. 50 et seq)

https://books.google.com/books?id=VgsAAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA50&lpg=PA50&dq=the+third+world+war+august+1985,+reviews&source=bl&ots=rVa8iSiS4j&sig=cGEfQ97pngw4kJz8_rayllAXyl4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=k6KCVPqHHdKZyASj0YLABA&ved=0CDkQ6AEwBDgK#v=onepage&q=the%20third%20world%20war%20august%201985%2C%20reviews&f=false

Rest assured, I will eventually find the item I mentioned, your insults notwithstanding.

Wicky and JonS,

I am really tired of these attacks on me. Every time I think you've finally learned to behave, you show me my optimism was misguided. Both of you have been warned about your bad behavior to me, and others, by BFC, and I have stood on my head to deal with your abuse without myself stepping across the line. And I have been goaded in the past, to such effect I got an Infraction for it. Your posts No. 14 and No 15 appear to be straightforward, knowing violations of the Forum Rules, as seen below.

http://www.battlefront.com/community/faq.php?faq=vb_faq#faq_bfc_forum_rules

General Rules

4. Members agree, through use of this service, that this Forum will not be used to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. Members agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by self, Battlefront.com, or its agents.

Abusive Personalities

5. Axe Grinder - it is only natural that people will occasionally have to agree to disagree. An Axe Grinder is someone who goes out of his/her way to make sure that such a topic remains a thorn in the side of an individual or the Forums in general. Usually it resurfaces in the form of snide comments or opinions restated as if previous debates never occurred. This causes old arguments, that likely have no resolution, to spark up again.

Regards,

John Kettler